lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:17:48PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> The only caller to this function was getting it wrong. I favoured

What caller?

Wrong in what way?

> pushing the calculation to as close to the need as possible rather than
> fixing the one caller.

This seems reasonable, but...

>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> ---
> include/linux/ftrace_event.h | 2 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_output.c | 3 ++-
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/ftrace_event.h b/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
> index c674ee8..e6b0262 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ const char *ftrace_print_hex_seq(struct trace_seq *p,
> const unsigned char *buf, int len);
>
> const char *ftrace_print_array_seq(struct trace_seq *p,
> - const void *buf, int buf_len,
> + const void *buf, int len,

How is the name "len" less confusing than "buf_len"?

I suggest matching the name to the equivalent argument of the
__print_array macro -- i.e., "count".

Cheers
---Dave

[...]



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-27 16:41    [W:0.054 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site